On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@xxxxxx> wrote: > Am 12.12.2010 07:38, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: >> Scott Kyle wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Scott Kyle wrote: >> >>>>> If I set the "submodule.<name>.ignore" then diffing around inside my >>>>> history will not show the changes to that particular submodule. >>>> >>>> Even if you set it to "dirty"? >>> >>> Setting it to "dirty" is far less disruptive, you're right, but that >>> wouldn't do me much good since my submodules are often on different >>> branches while developing. >> >> Ah, I see now. How about something like this? Untested, just a >> vague sketch to show the idea. > > Me thinks your proposal of a new "worktree" option makes sense. Let's > hear what Scott says ... > I mostly really like how 'worktree' can let me focus in on only the submodules I care about. The drawback is that git status would no longer list my true status. I know that may sound hypocritical, but I intended for this patch to only affect my PS1. At the same time, I would like to see the 'worktree' patch taken, regardless of whether you guys find mine useful. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html